DNA For Information Processing and Data Storage 234
Haydn Fenton writes "Here is an article on using DNA for data storage and even information processing. From the article, "The DNA molecule - nature's premier data storage material - may hold the key for the information technology industry as it faces demands for more compact data processing and storage circuitry. A team led by Richard Kiehl, a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Minnesota, has used DNA's ability to assemble itself into predetermined patterns to construct a synthetic DNA scaffolding with regular, closely spaced docking sites that can direct the assembly of circuits for processing or storing data.""
ha (Score:1, Funny)
Re:ha (Score:2)
Re:ha (Score:2)
It works on so many levels (Score:5, Informative)
DNA heroically unchanging (Score:3, Informative)
Good point.
When DNA does go bad, typically what happens is that the telomeres [nih.gov] wear out, leading to cell death.
-kgj
Re:DNA heroically unchanging (Score:5, Informative)
Re:DNA heroically unchanging (Score:2)
Thanks for the clarification.
-kgj
Re:So ... (Score:3, Funny)
You have forgotten Slashdot Rule #6: Don't let the facts get in the way of the moderation.
Broken data mends itself? (Score:2)
How about this for redundancy/error correction? DNA could yield almost inconceivably high storage values. Replication and repair could form a futuristic form of data integrity protection and duplication abilities. Want to copy your dish (petri, that is), have the DNA "replicate" itself - no hardware needed.
Petri-dish is a joke of course, but one wonders what the optimal instrument for storing such data would be?
DNA does not clone perfectly (Score:1, Interesting)
A 100th-generation copy of your favorite MP3 may sound as bad as a 100th-generation analog copy. Maybe not quite that bad, but the md5's won't match.
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:2)
Siliconase however does not exist.
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:3, Funny)
D'oh (Score:1, Funny)
So MySQL won't support it, then---but you can do it in the application layer.
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:1, Interesting)
And it's really fun to make backups.... (Score:1, Funny)
Re:And it's really fun to make backups.... (Score:2)
"Only wimps use tape backup: real men just wank over their ftp server, and let the rest of the world mirror it."
- Definitely Not Linus Torvalds
Re:And it's really fun to make backups.... (Score:2)
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not so certain that's something to brag about in this case. DNA may be stable, but DNA replication is not always reliable and accurate. Genetic mutations are common - they are the result of random errors in the replication process. Some organisms have turned really rotten replication accuracy into an advantage (e.g. HIV, which mutates so fast that it has demonstrated an amazing ability to survive everything science has thrown at it). Other organisms
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:2)
btw HIV is RNA (retro) virus
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:4, Interesting)
Science fiction may have an answer too. I believe the Slavers [Niven, Known Space series] engineered giant food animals (with intelligence just because the Slavers were really mean) that had specially engineered DNA so that they would not be impacted by radiation. As you say, mutation is necessary in evolving systems, but if one were engineering a system, you'd want to take that out of the equation.
Viruses (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It works on so many levels (Score:2)
The backbone of DNA is very stable, but the bases definitely do not fit your description (indeed, I smell troll). Bases can be oxidized (drink your anti-oxidants), thymines can be fused (UV light causes this), etc. The reason DNA retains such high fidelity over such a long time is because there are enzymes in the nucleus that are specifically designed to repair these unwanted changes (for example, 8-oxoguanine is repaired to guanine
640K DNA molecules... (Score:3, Funny)
-GillBates0.
But Office is bigger than your DNA. (Score:1, Funny)
Either Human DNA is programmed very well, or Office is programmed very poorly.
So how long... (Score:5, Interesting)
Or
How long until spies pass messages along in the form of biological matter by sneezing into a tissue?
Or
How long until we can buy books in readable vials full of liquid?
The possibilites are endless and cool but of course it will probably just be used to sell us Coca Cola... so much wasted potential.
Re:So how long... (Score:5, Funny)
Each DNA strand is a number. Like the Hebrew A, Alef is 1. B, Bet is 2. You understand? But look at this. The strands are inter-related. Like take the Hebrew word for father, 'Ab' - Alef Bet... 1, 2 equals 3. Alright? Hebrew word for mother, 'em' - Alef Mem... 1, 40 equals 41. Sum of 3 and 41... 44. Alright? Now, Hebrew word for child, alright, mother... father... child, 'Yeled' - that's 10, 30, and 4... 44
Re:So how long... (Score:1)
Been too long since I've seen Pi =) So the 3 word quote I gave is probably wrong.
Re:So how long... (Score:4, Insightful)
Think about it this way... the Bible was originally written in Hebrew. The Hebrew alphabet has 22 letters. Do you really think that the Christian God (should he exist) thought far enough ahead to include people in the bible who numerological name conversions would apply in English? No, that's absolutely absurd.
This is why I swerve to hit these wacky numerologists out there. They're so blissfully ignorant of the arbitrariness of our numbering system and number of letters in our English alphabet that they try to apply some grandiose scheme to letters in order to convince people that they're some kind of mystic.
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
Although I absolutely agree with you in regards to these crackpot code schemes, your reasoning here is flawed. The Christian God, as taught in the Bible, is omniscient (all-knowing) as well as sovereign (in control). He is outside of time and knows exactly what the future holds. Therefore, He certainly could think "far enough ahead
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
Yes, I do believe in an omniscient God.
Quite honestely, I do not know. Why did He create the universe at all. It is not as if He needed it. I suspect the truth relies somewhere in the realm of creating a being that could choose to follow Him and so that He could communicate and relate with them -- somewhat like a RPG developer. It would be much more thrilling to be able to create a truly AI game character that you could talk to and relate with rather than a scripted
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
The basic reason for rejecting their ideas was when those ideas were reduced to simplest common assumptions, the Gnostics believed in a God who would damn all the stupid people just for not being smart eno
Re:So how long... (Score:2)
Re:So how long... (Score:1)
How long until someone injects this crap into themselves and brings about the end of the world?
[cough]Darwins Radio[/cough]
How do you use here w/o the damned site censoring out the funny fake HTML tags.
Forget the spies (Score:2)
Integration of technology and biology has scary possiblities... especially in nanotech.
Convert me now! (Score:1)
Re:Convert me now! (Score:2, Informative)
The things people doubt (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The things people doubt (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The things people doubt (Score:2)
Re:The things people doubt (Score:2)
I was looking into genetic algorithms at first, then decided that to really understand genetic algorithms I should look at nature and went and studied cell bio and genetics. For a comp-sci guy that was a humbling experience... we think that we are so smart with our computers but they have nothing on the simplest of organisms. Anyway, where was I oh yeah
Leonard Adelman (sp?) did some really interesting work with DNA computing (about 10 years ago, p
Re:The things people doubt (Score:2)
Protists are awesome; our trick, as multicellular organisms, is that we build houses out of lots of bricks. But protists build an entire house out of just *one* brick. I think thats impressive.
I agree- it's amazing how much is packed into a single cell organism.
Re:The things people doubt (Score:2)
they are so sophisticated; one of the things I always wanted to try was putting protists through the kind of cognitive psych tests that they use on rats and pigeons to guage their intelligence and ability to learn from experience. I have a suspicion that there would be some surprises..
Re:The things people doubt (Score:2)
SCO and DNA (Score:4, Funny)
Re:SCO and DNA (Score:2)
Yep you must be of your protected IP.
Hi-Tech & Stylish... (Score:1)
Slow Posting (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Slow Posting (Score:2)
Re:Slow Posting (Score:2)
base 5 computing? (Score:1, Insightful)
(base 5, would the 'slots' be called "quints" - not sure)
I would wonder - though, how quickly data transfer would really be....cell replication takes awhile because the DNA splicing takes a long time, right?
Re:base 5 computing? (Score:2)
Re:base 5 computing? (Score:2)
1. it's spelled protein.
2. It can only be a, c, g, t in dna
3. those aren't proteins they are bases
4. Proteins are coded by dna, they do not comprise dna in any way.
5. Dna doesn't get spliced during cell replication. It gets copied.
6. therefpre isn't a word.
Re:base 5 computing? (Score:2)
No they are not peptides either. They are simply bases. You are right though NULL doesn't work. The fact that they come in pairs doesn't limit this in any way. You always get 2 strands of dna they pair with each other. So long as you only look at one strand there are four possibilities in each position.
Re:base 5 computing? (Score:2)
This would be very difficult, Since each strand is a template for the other during replication. If adding uracil as a seprate base you would also loose the nice RAID(mirroring) feature.
Re:base 5 computing? (Score:2)
Well a biochemist of sorts would be better. As a genetecist I'll respond. A pairs with T and C pairs with G. Dna is a double helix and one is an exact inverse copy of the other. Where one has an A the other has a T and vice versa. Since generally only one strand is read you have base 4 at each site.
Nasty unforeseen consequence (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Nasty unforeseen consequence (Score:3, Funny)
What are the possibilities? (Score:1)
I find this to be an extremely interesting and inventive process, but from the article I can't really decide if it has, or ever will have the ability to make something that isn't just a repeated pattern. Does anyone else know a little more about this technology?
Already see problems. (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Already see problems. (Score:3, Funny)
So now... (Score:2)
Re:Already see problems. (Score:2)
DNA versus the Elecron (Score:2, Interesting)
The problem is the energy (Score:2)
Re:DNA versus the Elecron (Score:2)
*eyes boggle*
Pop quiz, a DNA molecule (I'll be sporting and add "the smallest one possible") contains how many electrons?
How does your universe work, where the fundamental information element of the universe is the "slot"?
Make your own at home (Score:1)
DNA plus Information Processing equals... (Score:3, Funny)
I, Jedi (Score:1)
Just Imagine.... (Score:1)
Not only does your computer get infected....so do you!.
Performance Limits on Chemical Computation (Score:5, Informative)
Performance Limits on Chemical Computation [dyndns.org].
Re:Performance Limits on Chemical Computation (Score:2)
The Slashdot-relevant portion of the abstract:
This doesn't speak to using DNA as a construction scaffolding, which I am not skeptical of, but DNA computing has never
Re:Performance Limits on Chemical Computation (Score:2)
Re:Performance Limits on Chemical Computation (Score:2)
You're wrong.
Specifically, you're wrong in the assumption that I haven't considered it.
Read the paper. If you don't understand it (I basically did, I have the background for it), well, you feel free to believe whatever you like, but have you got the science?
Amoung the other points made in that paper, parallelism isn't free; consult the paper for details. A well-designe
Wont take off (Score:1)
USB Time (Score:1)
An extra "h"? (Score:1)
Am I the only one who thought of the MST3k episode where they did "The Human Duplicators?"
I would prefer to use RNA (Score:4, Funny)
I will use RNA (Raided Nucleic Acid) instead.
Carl Sagan pointed out in Dragons of Eden (Score:5, Interesting)
When that data access speeds up another 8 or 10 orders of magnitude and is both R and W,[and not much sooner!] we can talk about DNA as if it were magnetic media and seriously talk about its applications...Makes you wonder if the lessons of open source are going to have to be rediscoverd as we further exploit what software engineering has to teach us about handling DNA.
DNA computers (Score:4, Interesting)
This sort of DNA computer could be useful for a number of problems that involve a lot of trial and error, such as protein folding. In a paper some years ago some scientist managed to solve a traveling salesman problem using one such computer. They generated different strands corresponding to each city, and let them mix in a tube randomly to produce different candidate 'paths'. Then, they used some chemical selector (the tricky part) to eliminate the strands corresponding to invalid paths. Left in the tube were all valid paths, which could then be easily replicated using PCR.
I couldn't find the original paper, but a pretty good explanation can be found here [howstuffworks.com]
Re:DNA computers (Score:2)
I can just hear it now... (Score:3, Funny)
Been done in Star Trek (Score:2)
DNA is problematic. (Score:2)
Having said all that, if you've massive archives where you're less interested in immediate access as
Re:DNA is problematic. (Score:2)
The Selfish Gene... (Score:2)
Evolution has worked for billions of years. I'd say it's worked out quite a few of its bugs. So why don't we copy it when doing computing? I think the book stated (VERY generally, I assume), that there are 4 bits that get used to build with DNA - A, T, C, and G... obviously this has advantages, so why are we using binary computers
Re:The Selfish Gene... (Score:2)
On the othe
Speed of the Brain (Score:2)
Man, always thought my computer had no trouble winning against my brain in terms of speed.
Re:Speed of the Brain (Score:2)
Hacking DNA (Score:2)
Had to be said. (Score:2)
Safeguards In Mind? (Score:2)
Computers used to cost the government and corporations huge amounts of money. The desktop computer competition brought these fees down tremendously and even when governments, companies, and universities find a need for something different, they
Oh no - here it comes... (Score:2)
hmm... (Score:2)
hmm...maybe not...
Re:Cheaters Paradise? (Score:2)
Re:With a name like "Seeman" (Score:2)
100% Troll
What is remotely "Troll" about that post? This TrollMod crisis is getting ridiculous.
Re:This just doesn't seem like a good idea... (Score:2)
Re:interdimensionall (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=134182&ci